Overview
Howsociable publishes reviews of social-media growth services, creator tools, and agency offerings. We commission hands-on testing, we pay for the products we review at the same prices the public pays, and we score against a public rubric. The reader should understand every claim we make — or tell us where we fell short at editor@howsociable.com.
Editorial independence
We accept affiliate commissions from some of the services we review. We do not accept payment for placement, for a positive review, or for keeping a negative review off the site. Vendors cannot preview or delay a review before publication.
The editorial team reports to the Editor-in-Chief, who does not report to the commercial team. Revenue decisions are made after editorial decisions are final, not before.
Scoring rubric
Every editorial review is scored against the same 5 criteria. Weights sum to 1.0 and a weighted average produces the published 0–10 score. The machine-readable rubric is available at /api/methodology.
| Criterion | Weight | What it measures |
|---|---|---|
| Account Quality | 30% | Looks at the realness of delivered followers/likes/views: profile pictures, bio completeness, historical posting, location diversity. |
| Delivery Speed | 20% | Time from order placement to completion. |
| Retention Rate | 25% | Percentage of delivered engagements still present after 30 days. |
| Customer Support | 15% | Responsiveness, refill handling, dispute resolution. |
| Pricing | 10% | Starting price, value per 1k delivered, payment methods, refund policy. |
Tiered review weighting
Not every review is equal. Alongside our editorial reviews, readers can submit their own. Those community reviews are classified into four tiers based on the verification signals present at submission. Weights are deliberately spread — a single evidence-backed review moves the aggregate about as much as ten anonymous ones.
| Tier | Weight | Verification signal |
|---|---|---|
| Unverified | 0.2× | Anonymous submission — no email, no account. |
| Verified account | 0.5× | Reviewer confirmed an email address at submission. |
| Client-invited | 1.0× | Review collected through an invite link from the business's own records. |
| Evidence-backed | 2.0× | Reviewer connected their ad account and the claim was verified against real performance data. |
| Flagged (any tier) | 0.1× | Automatic fraud signals (burst, duplicate, scattergun) floor any review to barely-visible weight until moderation clears it. |
The aggregate rating is only displayed once enough weighted volume has accumulated. We'd rather show nothing than show a misleading rating built from three anonymous submissions.
Conflicts of interest
A conflict of interest exists when a business, financial, or personal relationship could reasonably appear to influence editorial judgement. Our policy is simple: disclose up front, disqualify when the relationship is too close.
What we disclose
- Affiliate relationships. If we earn a commission when you buy through a link on a page, that page carries an explicit affiliate disclosure at the top.
- Sponsored content. We do not accept sponsored reviews. Sponsored posts, where they exist, are labeled "Sponsored" in the byline block and are excluded from our rubric, search ranking, and Trust Index inputs.
- Historical client relationships. If any member of the editorial team has previously worked with, been employed by, or consulted for a reviewed business within 24 months of publication, the review is re-assigned to an editor without that relationship.
What disqualifies us from reviewing a service
- Current paid consulting, employment, or advisory role with the reviewed business or its parent company.
- Equity holdings above 0.1% of outstanding shares or beneficial ownership through a fund in which the editor is a general partner.
- Direct family relationship (first degree) with an officer, director, or majority owner of the reviewed business.
- Unreleased mutual non-disclosure agreements limiting what the editor could publish about the service.
When any of the above apply, the review is either assigned to a different editor or declined entirely. The decision is recorded in the editorial audit log.
Bylines and fact-checking
Every editorial review carries the byline of a named human editor with a biographical page. We do not publish under pseudonyms. Reviews that touch on regulated claims (statistics, legal, health) are additionally fact-checked by a second editor and carry a "fact-checked" badge with the check date.
We do not use generative AI to write review prose. AI assists with research, data extraction, and summarization of public sources. Every paragraph is written and edited by a named human. AI-assisted components of the page are labeled where they appear.
Corrections
Mistakes happen. When a factual error is identified, the correction is published at the bottom of the affected review within two business days, including the date, the original incorrect claim, and the corrected claim. Material errors trigger a review re-score and a note at the top of the page.
Request a correction at editor@howsociable.com with a description of the claim, where it appears, and supporting evidence.
Right of reply
A business whose service we review in a critical way has the right to a published response. To exercise it, claim the profile and submit the reply from the claimed account. Replies are published verbatim subject only to our comment policy (no personal attacks, no defamation, no doxxing).
Takedown requests
We consider takedown requests where content is (a) factually incorrect (see Corrections), (b) infringes a valid copyright or trademark claim, or (c) contains personal information that poses a safety risk. We do not remove content because it reflects unfavourably on the reviewed business.
Legal requests should be sent to legal@howsociable.com. We respond to every request within five business days even when the outcome is to decline.
Contact the editor
Tips, corrections, or questions about this policy: editor@howsociable.com. We read every message and respond within one business day.